Tag: Janis Susan May

Of Dinosaurs and Digits

~ janispattersonmysteries ~ 5 Comments

by Janis Patterson


Be warned. There is a rant coming!


I am old. I must admit it. Some people might even call me a dinosaur… an appellation I am proud to claim. I mean, how nifty to have someone talking about you and being interested in you a couple of million years after you died!


I even wrote my first real book on an ancient manual typewriter. (My very first book was done with pencil and paper, but I was only four I hadn’t learned to type yet. I was ten before I could convince my dad to teach me.) Then, a couple of books later I graduated to a portable electric – an SCM in cloud blue – and boy, did I feel like I was in tall cotton. It was like heaven, and the bulging muscles the manual had built up in my fingers gradually faded away. My problem was paper. Paper was (proportionally) more expensive then than now and each draft required paper. Lots of it.


I became adept at adapting and scavenging. I’d use old drafts, slash a Mark-A-Lot through the typed side (which bled through to the other side, creating some interesting problems on occasion) and type the new story on the back. Then one day I got lucky. A business in the building where I worked went out of business and put half a dozen reams of their stationery out for garbage. Needless to say the garbage didn’t get them. For at least three books I felt so elegant typing my rough drafts on 35lb (I think – it was definitely heavy) deckle-edged grey paper. Sad thing was, there had to be a clean final copy typed for submissions. In those antique days there were no Xeroxes, just a very messy and expensive wet process copy machine, so you had to watch your one precious clean copy like a hawk, or go spend the time typing a second one.


Finally computers came in. My first memory typewriter/computer was an Olivetti, at the time the world standard instead of IBM, which wasn’t selling in the US so they were practically giving them away. It had about a two page memory and showed one line of copy at a time. And we writers were delighted. I used that for about two books then IBM PC clones became affordable even to poor writers like me and I adapted. I gave the Olivetti to my mother, but she could never master it. She’d call in tears so often trying to make it behave – it did work as just a regular typewriter just as well and was grade-school simple but she and it never did mesh, so I finally took it away from her and gave it to some charity.


With a small succession of ever-more-useful PCs I upped my output and was very happy. Some of the later ones even had internal memory, but the luxury of saving to a floppy disk was wonderful. The best thing, however, was the cut-and-paste function. Until that cut and paste was actually that, with scissors and cellophane tape and a lot of retyping.
I went through computers fairly quickly, as the older PCs seemingly weren’t made to last. Nowadays though, the computers are made to last, but the MicroSoft programs are ‘upgraded’ with depressing regularity and even more depressingly higher prices. This is what made me so angry with MS that my darling husband gifted me with a Mac Book Pro eight years ago, and it has ticked along happily ever since then except for a couple of swelling battery replacements.Yes, there was a learning curve, but I overcame that through pure fury at MS, and now have acquired two more Macs, one solely for long distance travel and another waiting in the wings to supplement my ageing Pro.


And still MS tries to keep their bottom line by dictating ever newer program ‘upgrades.’


This is the basic point of this rather angry little screed. Why must we continue buying and rebuying to get new features that we do not use, do not need and do not want in order to keep support for the programs we do use, need and want? Why doesn’t MS put out a ‘writers version’ – slimmed down, practical and simple to use – that doesn’t have something unwanted and complicated added on with deadly and costly regularity? Same reason they are becoming reluctant to sell a program in a one-time buy, preferring instead to make customers rent it so they can bloat and complicate it even further with ‘improvements.’


The answer is obvious, and I could describe it perfectly with one or two possibly rude words that no lady should ever use.


And that is why I’m exploring and switching to other ‘office-style’ suites. Someday I am going to find the perfect one, and when I do I’ll share my choice with you in case you should want it.


Of course, I could – and do – just keep using the version I like, but I live in terror of my data simply evaporating some day. (I do keep various versions in various formats – paranoia can save your life…) If necessary, I could go back to the manual typewriter or (though my aged fingers tremble at the thought) plain white typing paper and a pencil.


The thing is, writers should be concentrating on their writing instead of having to constantly juggle with the tools of writing. Is that such an outrageous concept?

Who’s In Charge Here?

~ janispattersonmysteries ~ 2 Comments

by Janis Patterson

Every so often one of my writers’ groups will conduct a workshop on ‘how to create a character.’ I’ve taken a few of them and the methods range from a half-dozen point checklist to a six page questionnaire that goes into such depth as the character’s favorite flavor of Jello, the schools he attended, what kind of pet he had as a child…. You get the idea.

I’ve tried them all, and each time created a deep, multi-faceted character. A completely dead deep, multi-faceted character. They had all the proper points, but they never came to life on the page. Working with them resulted in all the joy and sparkle of Silly Putty. Oh, they moved from Point A to Point B when I directed them, and spoke the words I put in their mouths, but they were reminiscent of nothing so much as Gumby or King Kong – their movements were obviously stop-animation instead of really coming to life.

So I quit taking classes and went back to what I’ve always done – letting the character come to me. Almost every writer has snorted with disbelief when I tell them about the birth of my characters, but – other than my occasional forays into how-to-create-characters classes – it’s always worked for me.

So what do I do? Nothing. My characters simply walk in, tell me their name, and start fitting into the vague storyline that I’ve started with. And yes, they tell me their names. Once I really didn’t like a character’s (the hero!) name and changed it. He didn’t like it, so he shut up and refused to speak to me again until I changed it back to what he wanted some three weeks later. Then the writing simply flowed because of his cooperation.

Who said writers had complete control in their own world?

I know this technique (technique? maybe dictatorship?) wouldn’t work for all writers. Huh, it may not work for any writer besides me, but that’s the point. Even if I’m the only one it works for, it does work for me. I know the character’s-favorite-Jello system works for some people. It doesn’t work for me, but I’m glad it works for them.

What I’m trying to say is that there is no one singular this-way-only technique for writing a book. The only thing that we all should do is write a good book. How we write that book is up to us. There are many good techniques, probably some I’ve never heard of. The important thing is that each writer has to find the one that works for him. Or which ones work for him. There’s no rule saying you can only use one technique. As long as you turn out a good book, it doesn’t matter.

Are You Listening to What They Are Saying?

~ janispattersonmysteries ~ 2 Comments


by Janis Patterson

Books are a widely varying commodity. Some are so wonderful you could live in that world forever. Some are so bad you don’t even try to finish them. Most fall somewhere in the middle. Right now we’re dealing with a new kind of book, a kind of zombie product written by the abomination of AI and released by the overwhelming hundreds. Luckily – for now, at least – they are recognizable primarily for their lifelessness.


So what is it that binds these widely varying standards together – good, bad and zombie?


There are lots of things, but I believe a lot of it is dialogue. Good books have the characters speaking as if they were real people – not interchangeable cardboard cutouts. Of course, this is occasionally a rule that can be tweaked. In a futuristic sci-fi populated with human-android characters, the speech patterns and word choices would be different than in a light-hearted Regency romance, and each choice should be congruent not only with the time and setting of the book, but with the status/occupation/ethnicity of the individual character.


For an only slightly exaggerated example, everyone is familiar with the slave Prissy’s exclamation during the battle of Atlanta sequence in Gone With The Wind – “I don’t know nothing ‘bout birthing no babies.” As offensive as some modern readers might find it, her heartfelt cry is commensurate with her time, her status and the situation of the scene. Just imagine how jarring it would be if she were to say : “Good gracious, Miss O’Hara, I am completely ignorant of the processes involved in delivering a baby.” That would pull the reader right out of the scene. To a large extent, language equals character.


And the principle doesn’t really change no matter what the genre, though the actual words probably will. In a hard-boiled detective story, a police sergeant is not going to speak the same way as a career petty thief. In a western, a wealthy rancher with political aspirations will sound different from a brow-beaten saddle tramp. In a Regency romance a high in the instep duke will have a completely different vocabulary and range of meaning than a poverty-stricken dock worker. In a contemporary romance sometimes the difference will be less blatant, mainly because of the ubiquity of books and television acting as influencers, but there will be noticeable differences.


Just to make the convoluted even more so, know that all the above can be overridden if the plot demands. Perhaps the duke is working on the docks to find out who is stealing his fortune or something. Perhaps the weary saddle tramp is really a Pinkerton man out to investigate the rancher whom he thinks is really setting himself up as a dictator. Perhaps…. you get the idea. Confustication upon confustication. But you must play fair with the reader – not by telling him from the outset what is going on, but by allowing him to listen to the various people and find out the truth for himself.


Language equals character.


And if you’re writing a hard sci-fi about three-eyed, blue-skinned Orychiks from the Dyinolive galaxy with no humans involved you’re pretty much on your own… just remember that in almost every society the ‘elites’ (for want of a better word) speak differently than the ‘hoi polloi’ (again for want of a better word) primarily as a matter of status. I think this need for distinction, for individuality (even in a herd sense) is hardwired to people’s/being’s innermost self. Even among most animal species there is a distinct pecking order.


Just remember two things – language creates and showcases character, and you must play fair – enough that the reader can follow along with you and understand, even if you do pull a few tricks along the way.

You Want to Know What???

~ janispattersonmysteries ~ 2 Comments

by Janis Patterson

Am I weird? (Wait – don’t ask my husband that – we all know what he’ll say!) But regarding writing, I think I really am totally out of step.

Got an ad this morning from yet another one of those proliferating ‘publicity’ sites offering a new site/protocol/scheme for publicizing my books and ‘helping me to personally interact with my readers.’ I don’t get that. Yes, I know the lifeblood of a book is publicity, and I’m willing to pay for that, but interacting with my readers on a personal level? Really?

I don’t want to interact with my readers and turn them into friends. I have a lovely bunch of friends, some of many decades’ standing, and don’t need nor particularly want to make loads of new friends ‘with whom I can share things’ – especially not through the mechanical grist mill of the internet. I don’t see why my readers would want to talk about – or even be particularly interested in – my private life. My biography is on my website, and it covers everything, if not a little more, about me than any reader should want to know.

What difference is it to the readers how I take my coffee or what color my kitchen curtains are (or if I have curtains in my kitchen at all!) or what I name my pets? How does knowing that affect their enjoyment of my books? Or, more to the point, what business is it of theirs? They are buying my books, but should that also give them access to my private life?

One thing that these ‘I really want to know the real you’ type readers never seem to accept is that the time spent with them discussing pets, kitchen curtains, coffee or any other personal thing is time taken from my writing the next book. ‘Oh, but I’ll only take a little bit of time,’ they croon, ‘I don’t want to bother you…’ without realizing that if I spend ‘a little bit of time’ with everyone who wants a piece of my life all my writing time will be gone and there will be no more books, as I refuse to sacrifice a moment of my family/home time for anything on this earth.

Why is being privy to another’s life – another whom you will probably never meet in person or have a real relationship with – considered so important? Isn’t it my stories that caught their attention to begin with? Why can’t they be satisfied with them? It’s none of their business how I drink my coffee or decorate my house or anything else.

I write the books. They buy and read the books. That is the basic equation, and is all both writers and readers should need.

And although the holiday is over, my new anthology THE FOURTH OF JULY MURDERS is still available on Amazon… Four authors. Four murders. Four wars. It’s great fun!

Following Through

~ janispattersonmysteries ~ 1 Comment

by Janis Patterson

There is not much about writing in this post. Actually, not much about anything. Remember last month when I posted about the necessity and occasional dangers of researching? Well, I put my money (and lots of it this time!) where my mouth is.

As you read this I am – if our somewhat fluid itinerary is accurate – bouncing along in a jeep somewhere in the desert between St. Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai and Petra in Jordan. Am I researching a new book? Probably, though that was not the intent of the trip. However, I can do research on a book with a trip to the grocery store, so that’s not surprising.

No, my husband and I have decided to spend as much time as we can traveling – while we can afford it and are still physically able. I know it’s a luxury, but we’ve both worked hard all our lives and it’s something we want. And we don’t want to miss a chance to fulfill our dreams just because we got lazy.

We started a few days early in Cairo, to visit both a few of our favorite spots and to see old friends, then joined the small group of pilgrims to go on to the Dead Sea. I’ve been there before, and it is still as much of a moonscape as I remember. Then to the fabled St. Catherine’s… ah, but I’m telling too much. Next month I’ll talk a little about my trip and show a few pix. There will be more of both on my website, though, if you want to see more!

And – just a bit of writing news. I’m part of a new anthology called July 4th Murders – where every story takes place on July 4th, but each in a different time period. It’s a fascinating concept and one of which I am proud to be a part. I’ll let you know the exact date it goes up for pre-order.

After we get back from Petra, though. That’s been on my bucket list for years, and I intend to enjoy every second of it!